Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Friday, 9th May 2008 Change Date

Evening News / Sony Centre Reverse Auction

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Gordon Brown warns: ' Retreat into 19th century nationalism is not an option'



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 25 March 2008
THE Prime Minister will today stamp his authority on devolution discussions by stressing he will continue to make the case for the Union.
As Des Browne, the Scottish Secretary, announces the launch of the constitutional commission set up to examine more powers for the Scottish Parliament, Gordon Brown warns that there must be " no retreat into 19th century nationalism".

His strong intervention will be seized upon by critics of the commission, who claim the result of its deliberations are a foregone conclusion and that Mr Brown has closed his mind to any real change.

The Prime Minister also wants more focus in Scotland on wider issues such as the economy and national security to remind the population of the importance of the United Kingdom and the Westminster government.

In an article published today, he claims the Union reflects selfinterest for all the nations within " the world's most successful multinational state", but it is more than " a contract of convenience that can be renegotiated".

" The Union is a multiplier for good that too often and for too long has been taken for granted," he wrote. " It is time now to explain how the Union can benefit all of us and not at the expense of each other."

His comments come as Wendy Alexander, the Scottish Labour leader, Annabel Goldie, the Scottish Conservative leader, and Nicol Stephen, their Scottish Liberal Democrat counterpart, prepare to unveil the person who is to chair the commission. In the Commons today Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, is due to publish his latest constitutional reform proposals.

He will set out a statement of values that define British citizenship, with the case for a bill of citizens' rights and obligations. The constitutional commission will start work soon with the aim of making recommendations on which powers should be transferred from Westminster – and any that should be returned from Holyrood – within the next year.

The commission is Ms Alexander's flagship policy and an attempt to counter the SNP's national conversation, a discussion about independence. She has said the body should consider introducing more tax raising powers for Holyrood. But yesterday, Mr Brown was accused of attempting to " downgrade" the commission by renaming it a " review". The Scotland Office issued a news release describing the body as the " Scottish Parliament Review". Until now, Labour, the Lib Dems and the Tories at Holyrood have all described the tripartite group as the Scottish Constitutional Commission.

This was the name given to the body when it was granted parliamentary approval, and a spokesman for Labour in the Scottish Parliament was adamant yesterday that there had been no change of name. However, the SNP was delighted with the confusion.

Bruce Crawford, the business manager, said: " Gordon Brown has humiliated Wendy Alexander by seizing control of her commission, downgrading it to a ' working party' and reducing ( her] big vision to an attack on the Liberal Democrats for refusing to consider handing powers back to London."

A spokeswoman for Alex Salmond, the First Minister, added: "The question now is why the ' review', intended to be a body of the Scottish Parliament, has been taken over by Gordon Brown and announced by his Scotland Office colleagues."

The full article contains 544 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

karinxx,

25/03/2008 00:08:49
and where in the scotsman is the mention of what he said about "to be scottish is to be anti union."

2

karinxx,

25/03/2008 00:09:28
with that comment brown will have annoyed the many scots who think of themselves as scottish first.
3

Highland Mighty,

25/03/2008 00:25:55
"But you said it was a 'commission' but he called it a 'review'!"

And the SNP yet again show why they are little more than schoolchildren. Very mature and statesmanlike!

4

subrosa,

25/03/2008 00:42:54
A commission or a review, it doesn't matter what they call it. It'll never come up with anything in the least constructive to help Scotland. We all know it's purely a superficial tactic to delay any form of giving us extra powers. That'll have to be undertaken by the SNP alone but they'll get there in the end I'm sure.
5

The Daleks,

Longmen 25/03/2008 01:28:47
Broon the Balloon.

Can't he get anything right?

Wonder what he'll do for a living after the next general election?
6

Guga II,

Rockall 25/03/2008 02:29:41
What else can you expect from Maggie Broon. His Union Jack underpants are too tight.
7

Advance Alba,

edinburgh 25/03/2008 02:29:59
I note the difference in approach between the unionist parties and the SNP. The SNP favour exclusively the top-down approach, where the politicians sit in closed rooms and do back room deals and then impose the results on the people. No consultation, just a stitch up deal done to suit the politicians. Then there is the SNP approach. Start by consulting the people, and all the way through it is a bootom-up approach, where the people say what they want and the politicians devise ways of delivering against what the people have said. A world of difference. The SNP trust the people. The unionists do not, and keep them coralled i n pens outside. I know which one I prefer.
8

Edward,

25/03/2008 02:44:57
Brown, as ever a control freak!
No wonder they called him Stalin Brown in the TReasury, when he was chancellor
All right thinking Scots, should ignore what the Labour / Libdem / Tory - Commission come Review come Working Party come out with, after all they ignored the Scottish people
9

Edward,

25/03/2008 02:49:35
Brown stated ' that to be pro-Scottish, you must be anti-Union'
The guy is unreal, hope the folk in Kirkcaldy that voted for him are proud that they have a complete idiot for an MP
10

Edward,

25/03/2008 02:52:42
Browns full article in the Daily Telgraph
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/03/25/do2501.xml
11

Edward,

25/03/2008 03:02:00
From the Telegraph article :
'the Union is more like a covenant founded on shared values'
Come again? Brown seems to be trying to re-write history here, by making out we were all jolly about it in 1707
12

Castaway,

25/03/2008 04:41:12
In the document "Change is what we do" by Wendy Alexander the word commission is mentioned 19 times and the word review nil. Does this mean that the document will have to be reprinted to prevent confusion because the Scottish Office will be using the Scottish Parliament Review while the Labour, the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives at Holyrood will be using the Scottish Constitutional Commission.
Review - Look at again; examine again.
Commission- A special group delegated to consider some matter.
13

David MacVicar,

web 25/03/2008 05:14:08
New Labour in Scotland : 'Cringe' is what we do.
14

Argyll on line,

Argyll 25/03/2008 06:38:43
Remember John Major's 'taking stock'? Same farce all over again.
15

donald,

glasgow 25/03/2008 06:44:45
Commission, Review. What's the difference? They will be forced to concede a little more in a futile bid to stem Independence.
16

Bob Christie,

25/03/2008 06:49:51
First a commission, now a review, shortly then the benediction!
17

Alberto.,

25/03/2008 06:50:44
New Labour plc - Perpetual liars and cheats"

And aren't they excellent at it!!
18

McNasty,

Edinburgh 25/03/2008 07:13:38
GB, MP and PM of GB should prove his "Britishness" by getting an English seat at Westminster.

He should join other losers like Malcolm Rifkind and Teddy Taylor where he belongs; out of Scotland.

19

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 25/03/2008 07:13:58
I can just see the effect of the review recommending the return of powers from Holyrood to Westminster over the objections of the majority of people in Scotland.
You may see a result similar to what they have had in Canada where the people in Quebec consistantly elect a majority on Nationalist MP's to represent their interests as they don't trust any of the Federalist parties. This results in the Block Quebecois having an effective veto over legislation as the main parties are unable to form a majority.

You may see an unholy alliance of the unionists in holyrood but you won't see one in Westminster. There efforts to crush the Scottish peoples aspirations will result in the vast majority of Westminster seats going to the SNP at the next election as they are the only party willing to fight for Scotlands interest's. If this the case the SNP may be in a position where neither Labor or the Tories are able to form a majority with the SNP holding the balance of power.

I
20

pehman,

sussex 25/03/2008 07:51:44
If you read through wendy's vision thing again you'll see that where she mentions more powers to Holyrood it states that these will be "CONSIDERED" whereas the other points she makes are all to be taken as real goals.

So the truth is there is no substance to any of it wheather commission or review. It's all just talk.

Just as an aside, suppose she does return powers to w/minster just as the tories take control, it should work wonders for the SNP

21

brownlie,

glasgow 25/03/2008 08:14:12
I hope that, at the next General Election, the SNP put forward a candidate as MP for the Berwick on Tweed area.
22

Dr. James Wilkie,

Vienna 25/03/2008 08:29:56
It is a good thing that the name had been changed. An independent Scottish Constitutional Commission already exists and has been working for a long time already: http//:www.constitutionalcommission.org

Look at it from the point of view of a foreign diplomat having to report home to his or her government. Three opposition parties combine to review the constitution, the government of the day is excluded from the set-up, and the agenda includes only those proposals that these minority parties allow to be discussed. I don't think that will be taken very seriously anywhere else.

I will give the Labour Party credit for consistency. They tried, and failed, to kill the devolution project from the very beginning, but were forced into it by international ultimatum. Since then, their policy has been to water it down as far as possible, and keep the rest under their own control in order to prevent any further development. See the Scotland-UN papers at: http//:www.realmofscotland.com

They seem to be under the illusion that their one-party state in Scotland can somehow be revived. In a nation that has produced some of the world's greatest political philosophers Labour's survival will need more than an unreasoning gut reaction to the tide of change that is rolling over it. On present trends the Labour Party in Scotland is on the verge of permanent extinction as a political force - and justifiably so, because like other dinosaurs it has failed to keep pace with what is happening in the world around it.

23

Linda,

Edinburgh 25/03/2008 08:41:34
Dinosaurs at Westminster obviously don't realise that Scottish economy cannot get any financial advantage until such time as the Scottish Parliament has full fiscal autonomy or independence.

The National Conversation considers all the options., unlike the British Nationalists Review which does not consider all the options and any proposals will be vetted by a Gordon Brown approved Chairman
24

John S,

25/03/2008 08:59:58
Gordon Brown to ask cash-for-honours donors to extend their loans.
By the end of this year, eight businessmen who lent Labour more than £10 million to fund the 2005 general election campaign were due to have their money repaid. However, the Labour Party would be unable to afford the repayments and they will be asked by Gordon Brown to extend their loans to Labour for up to a decade.
Under Mr Brown, Labour has grown increasingly dependent on the trade unions for funds.Telegraph 22/03/2008
25

David MacVicar,

web 25/03/2008 09:14:23
Dr. James Wilkie,

You have made numerous interesting posts to this papers forum and you appear to be closely linked to RealmOfScotland.

However RealmOfScotland makes a number of grand claims surrounding the impact of the Scotland-UN papers etc.
Various posters have been wondering what real impact they had and what evidence you have to substanciate these claims.

Could you shed further light on any of this, or further online sources, please? I would like to know if there is another online forum to get further details?

Thanks.
26

Calum10,

25/03/2008 10:16:19
Not only is this a name change from Scottish Constitutional Commission to Scottish Parliament Review it also highlights that the Scotland Office is now in control of the process.

Labour, Tory and LibDems MSPs have sold out en-masse to 10 Downing Street. Scots can clearly identify Wendy Alexander, Anabel Goldie and Nicol Stephens as being nothing more than political puppets of the Westminster parties.

Under this review London calls the tune and Scots are now expected simply to dance to it.

Our response in Scotland should be a collective two fingers to the Scottish Unionists who continually betray the people of their own country.
27

frank mcbride,

lusitania 25/03/2008 10:18:58
This is a last desparate throw of the dice by the Unionist Alliance.

There will be an "interim" report, just before the Westminster election, which will say that the Alliance have agreed increased powers for Holyrood. These increased powers will, however, not be ennumerated, nor will the repatriated power to Westminster; strategic planning.

Do not be taken in by the Unionist Alliance.

For a fairer, more prosperous Scotland, vote SNP.
28

Dr. James Wilkie,

Vienna 25/03/2008 10:19:18
#25 The www.realmofscotland.com website has no connection with the Scotland-UN Committee, which has now been wound up after its function was fulfilled with the recall of the Scottish Parliament. The organisers of the site merely requested the use of several of the S-UN documents, which are only a fraction of the total number. The series now lodged with the National Library of Scotland does not include some still diplomatically sensitive material that will be added in due course.

The only official admission to date that the proceedings mentioned in the documents actually took place was in a reply to a parliamentary question at Westminster by Dennis Canavan. It was, however, felt necessary to put the facts on record, without seeking widespread publicity, because of the Labour Party's totally unscrupulous abuse of diplomatic secrecy to present the devolution project as its own initiative and generally falsify the facts. The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe will not open the relevant papers for the meantime, because the monitoring process is still going on, and the records of the Cabinet Office and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office will also not be available for some time.

The website contains only the bare bones of the story, because a full account of how the Labour leadership tried to kill devolution, and then hijacked it when prevention proved impossible, would strain the credulity of the readers. But it happened. In particular, Tony Blair and his small circle, including Donald Dewar, seem to have kept Scottish Labour generally in ignorance of the true background to the devolution legislation. Blair and Gordon Brown both ostentatiously boycotted the opening of the Scottish Parliament and the Holyrood building to demonstrate their opposition to the whole devolution project, and since then have been trying to keep it to the minimum they can get off with.

29

 Ayrshire Scot™,

25/03/2008 10:20:59
Retreat to "19th Century Nationalism"? Makes you think of things like "British Jobs for British Workers", "Union flags in every garden", 19th century wars of aggression?
30

Sgurr,

25/03/2008 10:24:58
I'm confused. Is this the same Gordon Brown that supported Kosovan Independence? Or is it the Stalinist Gordon Brown who would rather control everything himself, against the will of the people? Is which case, why does he apparently support devolution? Between him and Wendy, they really are making Labour unelectable for another decade.
31

Very Rev Ian Paisley,

25/03/2008 10:26:16
Keep being British = reducing social mobility, send the poor and young into illegal wars and ensure the wealth stays in the South.

No thanks Gordon
32

Jackie Priest,

25/03/2008 10:29:27
Maybe someone, preferably Browqn himself, can clarify.

19th century nationalism?

What the hell is he talking about? Does he mean the kind of imperiliast nationlism exemplified by Britain, France, Russia and so on, which leaves Scotland firmly out the loop except as an assimilated (rahter than conquered) part of the British Empire.

Or is he referring to some kind of imaginary surge of Socttish nationalism in the 19th century, which never existed, given that the majority of people didn't play a part in the political process becaise they weren't able to vote, while the methods of government were, how shall we say? rather more stringent in dealing with rogue Scots than they are now.

I suspect that underlying this latest bungle of rheotric by Labour is the fact that they don't have the first idea what they're talking about. Because if they do mean the kind of naitonlism that led to imperial expansion of European powers across the globe, and are trying to apply this to the Scottish urge for independence, they are truly decending into the realms of fruitcake philosophy beased, as always, on a profound ignorance of Scottish history and, by the looks of it, the history of Europe overall.

What utter buffoonery on an unprecedented level. These people are clueless. Utterly clueless.
33

Calum10,

25/03/2008 10:30:02
Gordon Brown writing for the Daily Telegraph is a real slap in the face for the Hootsmon.

The Hootsmon and the Glasgow Herald have done their best to undermine the SNP with a daily diet of anti-nationalist stories and now Brown comes along and talks only to the Daily Telegraph, a paper that considers Scots to be a nation of subsidy junkies and whose readership considers Scots to be simply low-life scum that are an affront to Englishness.

Such rejection by Gordon Brown must really hurt the pro-Unions editors at the Hootsmon.

Perhaps the Hootsmon should take a leaf out of the Telegraph's book and starting attacking Scots for simply being Scots.
34

Jackie Priest,

25/03/2008 10:30:46
I'm shocked. Truly, I'm shocked.

I'm shocked about how stupid our politicians appear to be.
35

Jackie Priest,

25/03/2008 10:31:39
I should say, our Labour politicians. This kind of gaffery seems mostly to come from them.

What an incredibly bizarre thing to say.
36

Alastair the First,

25/03/2008 10:32:43
A Wendy Alexander puppet? Who'd be cruel enough to but their kids one of those? Does it come with a fee Gordon Brown to pull its strings?
37

Jackie Priest,

25/03/2008 10:34:48
The fact is also that the union is a consequence of the nationalist expansion of the English and latterly British Empire, so the contradictory nature of this remark is laughable beyond belief.

The break up of the UK is largely regarded as the final stage of the dissolution of Empire. So, if there is any argument to be made about "19th century nationalism", it is that the retention ofc the union is a continuation of it.

Everybody, please. Get these people out of government. They are not fit for it on any level and we cannot have people like this deciding on educational policies if this is how they interpret history. Dear God in Heaven.

38

Sgurr,

25/03/2008 10:34:49
frank mcbride - interesting thought. Yes, if I was Labour, staring down the barrel of defeat to the tories, and hoping that, in their minds, their Scottish automatons are going to either not vote or (god forbid!) vote SNP, then they might well suggest greater powers for holyrood....which will then, of course, not emerge/be a hollow promise as they won't get in anyway.
39

Sgurr,

25/03/2008 10:36:35
Brown is clearly trying to be Britisher than thou to win the English heartlands. Hence this piece is in the Telegraph. Who is he for? Did he mention gazza's goal again??!
40

Sgurr,

25/03/2008 10:38:14
ref#38 I'd meant to say *thinking that, in their minds..*, not *hoping that,...*

Cup of tea time.
41

Alex, Young Laird d' Drumchapel,

Madrid 25/03/2008 10:42:40
Whenever Gordon is up to his neck in the Broon stuff over economy, embryos or whatever he suddenly starts to save Britain. Pinky red-herring is all it is. You see, if you keep changing the subject people won't realise you're a one man disaster area..

Not impressed!
42

Jimmy the Pie,

25/03/2008 10:54:38
Waffle away all you want Comrade Broon. Your days are numbered. I just hope it's as soon as possible.

www.snp.org
43

uranus,

Falkirk 25/03/2008 10:59:21
People from the South of the border are saying that Brown in power at Westminster is a sure catalyst for the quick demise of the Union. His arguments are full of holes and the only reason for his pontification of Britishness is to mask his illegetimacy as the PM whom no one wants South and North of the border. As Wendy Alexander will preside over decimation of Labour MPs in Scotland in the next election which will remove Brown's power base and no English PM at Westminster in the future would dare dictating to Scotland.
If I were Brown, I would be planning for a career elsewhere, perhaps at the European Commission or World Bank. The problem is Brown like all Labour MPs is a career politician.
44

stan102,

Edinburgh 25/03/2008 11:01:16
Yet another soundbite from Gordon Turncoat Brown - why not spent some time and effort in looking for the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq thats costing us so dear in lives and tax Mr Brown.

You know something actually important to the people of this country.

45

Lauwrie,

25/03/2008 11:07:26
Nasty 7:13GB,
" MP and PM of GB should prove his "Britishness" by getting an English seat at Westminster. "

We don't want him .Brown is about as popular in England as rude smell in a lift .

46

iain morrison,

nairn 25/03/2008 11:07:26
Gordon Brown warns that there must be " no retreat into 19th century nationalism". - I agree as 19th century nationalism was the Union another Mr Bean (Nevile Chamerlain) moment to go along with his recent reference to Czechoslovakia
47

bratachdubh,

Dundee 25/03/2008 11:10:27
Just what exactly is "19th century nationalism"? The Jingoism of the British Empire?

The SNP appear to be practicing 21st century civic nationalism, as opposed to the 20th century jingoist Toryism Brown appears so fond of. No wonder the idea of "Britishism" has become a laughing stock.
48

irenecu,

Kirkcaldy 25/03/2008 11:15:04
I will never vote for that idiot or his war criminal party ever again.
I,and I am sure,many like minded people, have been persuaded towards the compelling case for independance, over the course of the last few months.
The SNP have promoted Scotlands interests more in the last 10 months than Labour has in the last 10 years.
They have a convert in me.
49

Rulesbutnotrulers,

Federation, not separation 25/03/2008 11:24:56
Only 15% of Scots are SNP if last election figures prove anything.
50

 Ayrshire Scot™,

25/03/2008 11:33:40
50. Only 16% of Brits are Labour, and 13% Tory, if the last UK general election proves anything.

Weird how the way votes are counted suddenly changed when the SNP won, usually votes are reported as a % of votes cast - which made the SNP Scotlands largest party at Holyrood and in local government.
51

Guga II,

Rockall 25/03/2008 11:36:44
"Mr Brown has renewed his attack on Scottish nationalism arguing that to be pro-Scottish, you must be anti-Union." (The Herald, 25 March 2008).

I can't see what is wrong with being anti-Union. What's Broon's problem? We know he had elocution lessons to get rid of his Scottish accent, to try and impress middle England, but now he wants to go further and prevent us being pro-Scottish.

I've got news for you Maggie Broon, we are not going to sell out our country or ourselves, for you or for anyone else.

He has also organised Jack Straw to tell us all, later today, what we have to do, and how we have to act, to be "British citizens". No doubt we will be told we have to support England at cricket (including the three people in Scotland that actually watch the stuff), and that we have to go along with Maggie Broon's Stalinist, totalitarian government; even when that war criminal wants us to continue to support illegal wars.

There may be some people in Scotland that are still bought and sold for English gold, but Broon, there are many more of us that are proud to be Scottish, and who want nothing to do with your servile and sell-out attitude.
52

Publius,

London 25/03/2008 11:39:35
Some interesting posts on the Telegraph website in reply to Brown. Quite a lot are English nationalist with one or two ant-Scots as well.
I don't know how representative these are. Telegraph readers are notoriously right wing and the Telegraph moderates out a lot of posts anyway. But Brown can only damage Labour in England by drawing attention to Britishness, devolution to Scotland (but not England) etc.
53

yockel,

25/03/2008 11:44:11
They'll be giving up 19th Century socialism next!
54

David MacVicar,

web 25/03/2008 11:48:33
28
Dr. James Wilkie

Thank you for shining some light on a subject that still leaves many unanwsered questions. However, until such information comes into the public domain, what you are saying that we have to take everything that is written about the circumstances at face value.

There is no clear timescale of when such info might be made public either, if ever.

A parliamentary question at Westminster by Dennis Canavan and the response(s) should be available through Hansard?

You should be aware that various people have been asking questions about the validity of what is said about the UN-Committe ...

55

The Former Mr. Angry,

Perth 25/03/2008 11:50:55
This 19th Century nationalism - wouldn't be of the English/British sort would it as previous attempts at the Scottish variety were suppressed militarily in 1745, one century earlier.

"His strong intervention will be seized upon by critics of the commission, who claim the result of its deliberations are a foregone conclusion and that Mr Brown has closed his mind to any real change."

Whoops - there goes Wendy's buzz-phrase in her latest crash and burn episode.
56

The Master,

25/03/2008 11:59:56
#32 Jackie Priest: why wasn’t there a clamour for Scottish Independence at the same time as the campaign within Ireland during the nineteenth century then? The fact that there was a limited franchise didn’t prevent the Irish from eventually gaining separation, so there is no good reason why Scotland did not become independent many years ago, except perhaps that the majority just don’t want it. Can’t you see that you Nats are in an out of touch minority and have been since 1707? If there were any real demand or case for Scottish separation it would have happened long before now and this thread wouldn’t exist in its current form, take it from me!
57

,

25/03/2008 12:07:03
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
58

Sedov,

Scotland 25/03/2008 12:17:38
Brown is spot on about nationalism -its a recipe for total disaster. however, only the unity of all workers across the UK can beat him and the bosses he stands up for and the NATS should grasp this fundemental rule of solidarity. And I never had the chance to vote for him. The first thing Brown done after his coronation was to invite Thatcher to Downing Street and like Blair before him he is just another Tory in disguise. So much for his past rhetoric about supporting working people - get him out now!
59

kimba,

25/03/2008 12:17:48
53.As a member of the English Democrats,I can assure you the comments on the telegraph website are more or less how the majority of English people feel.
60

brownlie,

Glasgow 25/03/2008 12:20:01
Guga!! When did you move to Rockall - you'll have the guy from Ness confused. I must be one of the three who support the English cricket team - I, also, on occasion support their football team. I worked in England for many years and made friends and acquaintance there so I have no problems with the English per se - maybe the football commentators. That does not mean that I do not passionately believe in Scottish independence as this country, as well as England, have been disadvantaged for many years by Tory/Labour/Tory/Labour. You will also be aware that a very high percentage of the English population were against the illegal Gulf war despite claims to the contrary by many unionist posters so it is not just Scotland that are let down by Blair/Brown.
61

Jimmy the Pie,

25/03/2008 12:22:59
#52 Guga

Excellent post
62

walter,

25/03/2008 12:23:10
#56
What are you talking about, 1745 nationalism, it was one lot of royalist trying to put who they wanted as king of Britain on the throne and another lot of royalists stopping them.
63

Jimmy the Pie,

25/03/2008 12:28:10
I do like the way Our Dear Leader, Comrade Broon supports nationalism in countries like Kosovo, Tibet and then lectures us about being British. And all that drivel about swearing allegiance to Britain by schoolkids. The man is a total ersehole
64

ldopas,

cheshire 25/03/2008 12:30:53
I dont get why we english are getting so much flak here. (Apart from the Trots who ovviously have another agenda entirely).

Brown is your man, a Scot sitting in a government that should be english, whilst you have your own parliament as well.

All we want is english independence. And your Scottish insurgent Brown to sod off back to the highlands.

Is that too much to ask? So why are we getting the rudeness from you lot, we want the same thing!
65

Calum Crubag,

25/03/2008 12:32:41
It's British Nationalism that worries me. Brown's jinoistic 'salute the flag' plan for schools in almost fascist. The 'empire' attitude in invading Iraq IS a throwback to the past.

Look forward to independence.
66

Calum Crubag,

25/03/2008 12:33:51
#65 - i've got nothing against the English but most of our complaints are about your ignorance. Like, 'sod off to the Highlands'! Why don't you get a map and try and find Fife.
67

Calum Crubag,

25/03/2008 12:35:41
Walter #63- Charlie did anull the act of Union upon entering Edinburgh so the Jacobites did have a nationalist agenda. True, this may only to have been to garner support as the union in the cities was deeply unpopular.
68

ldopas,

cheshire 25/03/2008 12:37:59
67 Calum Crubag,25/03/2008

Our ignorance? Unbelievable.

I suggest you read the litany of garbage posted about us in this and other forums.

We're sick of you winging sctos, we just want to make it stop. If you read what you post, you make us found worse that nazi germany, which we arent.

The sooner you get what you want and we get what we want then maybe you can turn your griping on someone else.

And Im in the majority down here.
69

Rulesbutnotrulers,

Federation, not separation 25/03/2008 12:38:23
Oh do grow up you lot!

I'm pro Scottish and pro British in much the same way as our son-in-law is pro Texan and pro USofA.

These identities are not opposites and only malicious numpties try to make them alternatives instead what they really are: mutual compatibles.

I'm anti SNP since it and its ideas are soooo passe. I'm no fan of Gordy, but do let's move on, eh?
70

ldopas,

cheshire 25/03/2008 12:41:16
70 Rulesbutnotrulers,Federation, not separation

Ive been many times to the US, and you are not seriously telling me that many southern states dislike the rest of the US? Many would have like the south to win the war and break free.

Also Texas is NOT a country. England and Scotland ARE. So its not the same thing at all!
71

Jackie Priest,

25/03/2008 12:42:39
#45

I don't see any former colonies pointing fingers at the Scots saying, "you were imperialists too!" You're just making that up because you think it sounds good. It's rubbish, your own invention.

Countries that are assimilated into empires become a part of the empire and, so, become participants in the empire itself. It's well known that many African tribes hunted other tribes in order to sell them to European slave traders. Does that make them imperialists too?

The unionist attempt to make Scots feel that they were equally complicit in the building of empire is revionists rubbish designed, as always, to make us feel that we should shut up, sit down and do what we're told.

The truth is that only a few people among the merchant classes and the aristrocy in Scotland benefitted form the Empire. And you will note that Glasgow is renowned, not for the extreme wealth it accrued during the age of empire, but for the attrocious conditions of urban depravation that have characterised the city since its growth during and after the INdustrial revolution.

Not much has changed either, which shows the full extent of the boons that the union has visited upon Glasgow.

Anyway, I'm still waiting for someone to explain what the hell Brown is talking about 19th nationalism for when it is as far removed from the wish for independence as the Planet Mars.

We can only assume that Labour are so desparate to inflict us with new angles of scare-mongering that they are being forced to invent things. I've never heard such nonsense as this, the latest of their silly ploys.
72

AJ Fife,

25/03/2008 12:42:48
In a future independent Scotland, would it be possible to deport or imprison Mr Brown for being anti-Scottish?

I don't think the usual jump leads and car battery will be enough for the dispicible Broon!
73

HughB,

Edinburgh 25/03/2008 12:44:56
What words of wisdom spoken by the boy wonder GB, and what an intellect in WA.

Neither of these two wannabees were elected by the people, and they will never be elected by the people.
74

ldopas,

cheshire 25/03/2008 12:46:05
72 Jackie Priest,25/03/2008

Dont tell me....you were only following orders, right? Sic.

You were prominent partakers in all the empire did, dont try and rewrite history. You sound like some football manager excusing an inexcusable tackle.

Your argument isnt made any weaker by accepting our shared past. We are talking about issues NOW.
75

qohldr,

25/03/2008 12:48:24
#52
"Mr Brown has renewed his attack on Scottish nationalism arguing that to be pro-Scottish, you must be anti-Union."

When talking in terms of being pro Scottish in the nationalistic way then he is right.

Your last sentence is proof of that very fact.

There may be some people in Scotland that are still bought and sold for English gold, but Broon, there are many more of us that are proud to be Scottish, and who want nothing to do with your servile and sell-out attitude.
76

Suomi,

Salo,Finland 25/03/2008 12:53:34
What on earth is 19th century nationalism,and who is asking for that? If Brown is referring to the SNP aim of independence then that is the normal status for most countries.It recognises the interdependance in the 21st century of nation states and is based upon parliaments of equal status who collaborate on issues of mutual interest.This 21st century nationalism is outward looking and very international.It seeks to harm no one and to be a good neighbour.

modern concept of 21st century nationalism described here is supported by millions of people throughout Europe and the rest of the world.It is the norm.It is also supported by thousands of Scottish residents (across all ethic groups),and Scots abroad, who represent all types of occuptations and socio-economic groups.These people want to reach out and join the rest of the world.Many small nations in Europe have already achieved this. For example Finland where I currently live and Slovenia who currently hod the presidency of the EU.I am sure that the Slovenian Ambassador to the UK,who recently visited the Scottish parliament would not recognise Browns concept of 19th century nationalism.It is time that Gordon Brown started to listen accurately and stopped this agreesive rhetoric.It is insulting to many ordinary people in Scotland,and living abroad,who want Scotland to join the 21st century.
77

kimba,

25/03/2008 12:54:47
AJ. BUT HE ISN'T,"We, gathered as the Scottish Constitutional Convention, do hereby acknowledge the sovereign right of the Scottish people to determine the form of Government best suited to their needs, and do hereby declare and pledge that in all our actions and deliberations their interests shall be paramount.....signed Mr G.Brown"; he's just looking after scottish interests,after all, who would pay for scottish "freebies" without mother England!
78

Jackie Priest,

25/03/2008 12:58:55
#75

Well, if you must know, I look on this issue, not as a Marxist (Which I'm not), but from a Marxist point of view.

It was not a case of nations colonising other parts of the worlds. Within the imperialist nations, the first step of empire building was the colonisation of their own people - in other words, the colonisation of the working/plebian classes by the aristocracy.

So, the first people to be colonised in the British Empire were the people of England.

Where 19th century nationlism comes in is where the ruling classes use nationalism as a means of controlling and motiviating the lower classes into doing the dirty work of empire for the sake of God, King and country or whatever.

This is not in any way significant in terms of our current argument of independence for Scotland. The aim of independence is actually dialectically opposite to imperialist naitonalism. It is about controlling your own country, not controlling other countries.

We all know this. It is frankly bizarre that this "19th century" thing is being touted by Labour. Bizarre beyond belief. They are completely without a clue. They have no idea what it is they are arguing for when the argue for the union. The reasons for this is that they are only interest in preserving the union because it benefits THEM. Don't forget that the end of the union may well signify the end of Labour party as a political force in England. They are desperate.

79

Iain's,

25/03/2008 13:02:05
Brown always talks about the past doesn't he.
So now seeking independence is a 19th Century thing.

Basically he is telling Africa, India and Pakistan that independence is old fashioned and they should rejoin the Empire.

80

Buckpool Loon,

Cheshire 25/03/2008 13:03:08
19th Century Nationalism. Did he forget the 20th Century - Irelands independence, despite all of the English establishments dirty tricks of Black & Tan's, the Auxilaries, their spies and retributions.

No, perhaps he meaningly left the 20th century out. He wouldn't want to divulge at this early stage the tactics he intends to employ.

Funnily enough the endless use of committees and inquiries is a similar ploy to the one Westminster adopted then. Few had any real purpose or force behind them in Irelands case, and none produced results - they were merely a strategem for procrastination and delay.
81

David MacVicar,

web 25/03/2008 13:11:15
"the Union reflects selfinterest for all the nations within " the world's most successful multinational state""

Hmm, where does that leave the EU then? What represents economies of scale, freedom of movement and multinational statehood better than the EU? What can the UK Union do that the EU cant do better in a modern world without nationalism?

But Wait...if reservation of key powers should be kept at nation level, then Scotland as a Country and a nation should therefore keep the powers that drive all the other nation states?

Oh dear, oh dear, the poor wee UK Brit nationalist/unionist numpty arguments have more gaping holes than Wendy Alexanders accounts records!


As for Wendy Alexanders 'Flagship' policy 'HMS Unholy Commision'.... I guess the flagship has well and truely sunk... and by another unionist into the bargain. What a farce!
82

kimba,

25/03/2008 13:11:49
79. It is about controlling your own country, not controlling other countries. One of yours i think,so please tell me why,the people of England should be governed by the "scottish raj",sorry,if we have to put up with them so do their own countrymen and women.
83

Conway,

25/03/2008 13:14:35
Its New Labour that is retreating back into 19th century nationalism BRITISH NATIONALISM.
It was SNP MSP Winnie Ewing that said STOP THE WORLD SCOTLAND WANTS TO GET ON and that is what the SNP wants.
To be part of the wider world.
the link to the Telegraph artice is .
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/03/25/do2501.xml
84

Rampant Warrior,

25/03/2008 13:20:08
I take my hat off to Gordon Brown, this gentleman has a very hidden agenda. I'm sure deep down he wants to see Scotland separate from the UK.

His genius in slipping in the odd statement now and again, example - regarding how we must be subservient to the British monarchy etc.

Alex salmond & his party are the group to action Scotlands Independance. Gordon Brown and to a lesser extent the tory & Lib leaders are the catalysts.

The transformation has begun & there's no going back.
85

kimba,

25/03/2008 13:24:57
84. Here's a taster of some of the comments; Five million work-shy, loud mouthed spongers with their begging bowls constantly shoved in the face of decent, hard working English folk. That is the reality of Union. It means nothing to me.
Posted by Barry Field on March 25,
86

Jackie Priest,

25/03/2008 13:25:02
#83

Because you voted for them.

It's a bit like football. In the same way you don't have any Englishmen capable of running your national football team, you don't have any English people capable of running your own country.

You should be thanking us for digging you out a hole, not complaining.

But, I agree. I think it's ridiculous that England is being run by foreigners. I understand your ire. I understand specifically because this has been the fate of Scotland for the past 300 years.

I'm rather glad that the English now have the chance to experience what it's liked to be governed by foreigners. It's ridiculous. Hopefully, we can now progress towards ruling ourselves so that this kind of farcical situation no longer arises.

In the meantime, the English really need to do something about preparing and conditioning people to do the top management jobs, in football as in government.

87

kimba,

25/03/2008 13:39:22
87. We have both the people and the will to govern ourselves,what we don't have is freedom to do so,brown signed an oath to put the people of scotland above all else,he is fulfilling that oath; free prescriptions,free care for the elderly,free uni places, and medication available in scotland for cancer treatment,whilst people in England and Wales die needlessly,and to cap it all England pays for the lot.
88

Suomi,

Salo,Finland 25/03/2008 13:46:26
Thinking again about Gordon Brown's very strange rhetoric about something called 19th century nationalism,there is a need to ask, what is wrong with him? He has been very weird recently and you do wonder what is going on.A man who formally lokked in control,now looks as if he has lost the plot.

For people who want 21st century solutions for Scotland,his reference to the 19th century is bizzare because it has no relevance to the here and now.looking back to the act of union,it could be said that 18th century unionism has no currency in the modern world either.That is,a solution devised in 1707 is well past its sell by date in 2008.We need to be foward looking not inward looking and backwards.I think that the changing world is a bigger threat to a solution fashioned in 1707 than the SNP.Popular though the SNP government are just now,they are the least of Gordon Browns problems.If he wants to hold back the tide,he had better be more effective than King Canute was.
89

TimW1234,

Ottawa, Canada 25/03/2008 13:46:40
kimba's back! Run for your lives!


The comments from him/her are incomprehensible and arrant nonsense.

Why does one have to go into another mental state to TRY and understand what that wacky poster is saying?
90

Nat King Troll,

25/03/2008 13:48:20
#86 kimba:

84. Here's a taster of some of the comments; Five million work-shy, loud mouthed spongers with their begging bowls constantly shoved in the face of decent, hard working English folk. That is the reality of Union. It means nothing to me.
Posted by Barry Field on March 25,

You wouldn’t have any connection with this Barry Field character, would you? Only asking, Master
91

kimba,

25/03/2008 13:49:21
90.Then I suggest you take some reading lessons,or is that not in your capability!